|
Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
04-04-2003, 03:35 AM
|
#1 | |||
|
Veteran Member
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: ""
Posts: 3,863
|
Poll: Are you a HJer, JMer, or agnostic on the issue?
Toto said in an earlier post:
Quote:
I only know Vork and I to be JMs - among those that frequent these boards. Too many times, Layman has reminded us of "Majority scholarly opinion..." etc when arguing. Now I would like each of us to state our position on the matter (including Toto  ). Oh, there is a fourth third option - abstain (abstain from voting of course). Kirby once stated that its nonsensical to create a (false) dichotomy between HJ and MJ. To be specific, he said: Quote:
Quote:
Now I would like you to post your position. Only four options are available abstain agnostic Jesus Myther Historical Jesus For the uninitiated, Jesus Mythers are those that believe that the Jesus of the Gospels never existed as he is portrayed therein and was an entirely mythical saviour figure like Attis/Horus/Osiris. Historical Jesus proponents hold that the person described in the Gospels once walked the earth as a flesh and blood man. These include people who believe Jesus was a demi-god - like Tercel and other versions like Jesus was a cynic sage, itinerant preacher, a pious man who was lionized etc etc. Just like HJers disagree on the actuan nature/occupation/activities of Historical Jesus, JMers might disagree on how this figure was fabricated, by who, when and its development and what contributed to spreading belief in it. Please leave those nuances out of this thread. Let the polls begin! |
|||
|
|
04-04-2003, 04:43 AM
|
#2 |
|
Veteran Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: 6th Circle of Hell
Posts: 1,093
|
I've read the arguments from both sides and right now I'm no expert and I'm young and stupid so I'm agnostic on the issue, but I'm kind of leaning towards completely mythical, although I'm willing to accept evidence for a historic jesus.
|
|
|
|
04-04-2003, 04:58 AM
|
#3 |
|
Veteran Member
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Quezon City, Philippines
Posts: 1,994
|
Agnostic, but leaning towards the HJ position.
|
|
|
|
04-04-2003, 05:30 AM
|
#4 |
|
Contributor
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Barrayar
Posts: 11,866
|
Gospels fiction, historical figures underneath somewhere.
|
|
|
|
04-04-2003, 05:38 AM
|
#5 |
|
Regular Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 412
|
Agnostic, leaning toward probably mostly mythical.
As he is portrayed in the Gospels? Basically mythical Willing to accept that there might be a kernel of historicity that was grafted together with the mystical stuff. Sort of like King Arthur and Robin Hood -- there is evidence for people in history who inspired those stories, but what is known doesn't match the later stories very much at all. |
|
|
|
04-04-2003, 05:54 AM
|
#6 |
|
Veteran Member
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 5,815
|
Agnostic, I suppose.
There are some very convincing similarities between Jesus and earlier mythical figures: too many to be coincidental, I think. So Jesus isn't "real", either as a genuine Son of God or as a human whose story was merely exaggerated. Mythology has been imported. But that doesn't rule out the possibility of a historical person acting as the nucleus for this accretion of myth. |
|
|
|
04-04-2003, 05:59 AM
|
#7 |
|
Veteran Member
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Singapore
Posts: 2,875
|
Like Secular Pinoy--agnostic, leaning towards HJ.
Like Vork--gospels are fiction. |
|
|
|
04-04-2003, 07:13 AM
|
#8 | |
|
Veteran Member
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: St Louis area
Posts: 3,458
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
04-04-2003, 07:16 AM
|
#9 | |
|
Contributor
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Down South
Posts: 12,879
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
04-04-2003, 07:24 AM
|
#10 |
|
Veteran Member
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 5,815
|
Is ShabbyChick a historical person, or entirely mythical?
|
|
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
